I'm probably EG/PG and in my 20s, and I've been really struggling with life. Most of the advice I see online or over here is for gifted children or relating to college. I still haven't settled into a career, although I've earned a couple of degrees. Basically, what I'm struggling with is this: There are popular conceptions of what one can or can not do at a certain age. "Children are sponges", etc. I have no idea what is possible or not possible for me specifically, and can't find advice that is meant for PG adults. I do feel like my neuroplasticity has gone down since I was a child, but I still present very differently than most of my peers. I would say I rely much more on "original seeing" in that far fewer of my opinions are taken from sources without a certain kind of synthesis. I seem to retain far more from conversations I've had with people and things I've seen and read and synthesize it all differently than anyone I know, but don't have any specific skill set that is incredibly in demand and can make the kind of living that people expect from you once you're out in the world. I feel like there is more far transfer in my learning, so learning new things tends to use similar patterns as things I've already learned. Every fact I know seems to have a probability associated with it, so my knowledge base and entire personality feels like it's constantly "in flux", in a way that I also believe is disorienting to people if I let them experience it. I've also been moderately depressed for the past 5 years, and it's very hard to tell what the effects of that depression on my cognition have been. I tend to probably falsely conflate depression effects with aging effects.
I'm unusually curious, although this has declined since childhood. My curiosity itself is quite unfocused, where I suspect ADHD-like tendencies. I find that most high average/low gifted working professionals I meet tend to be curious about things in their own domain but it is a very limited kind of curiosity that I find puzzling. It feels like my expertise in various things is a product of my mind-matrix generally being aware of a lot of topics instead of having a declarative knowledge base for one specific thing. There's a constant stream of new ideas going on in my head pretty much all day long, and the ideas are better in quality if I'm feeling better or if I'm feeling inspired (vs depressed). I used to think this was the case with anyone (Just spit out 3 working ideas for a novel, how hard could it be?) but have realized it really isn't. At the same time, I feel like I push up against my limitations almost every single day and it makes me feel like I'm not really all that intelligent, since then virtually everything would presumably be "easy". I have this tendency to minimize difficulty, and to talk to obviously very intelligent people with an air of "you're not that smart, nor am I". Some part of me thinks that if I can do it, it can't possibly be all that it's cracked up to be. For instance, when I learned relativity and realized it wasn't that hard, my first instinct was to think that people were gatekeeping this obviously fairly simple topic, as opposed to thinking that I'm unusually intelligent.
In some ways, my cognitive capacities have regressed. My memory, though still exceptional, seems to get worse every year. It might be in my imagination or it might not. How do I test this? Is it even that important -- is it useful to condition every decision you make on whether or not you estimate you have (or still have) the cognitive capacity to do it? Maybe it's a better way to live life to spontaneously decide what to do based on what you're interested in and then perhaps fall flat on your face? I think it is generally accepted that memory and neuroplasticity get worse every year, but how do I know how true that is for highly gifted people, or for people who keep them up, when psychological studies generally try to pretend that IQ does not exist?
I also don't trust experts all that much. I know that they are generally not as intelligent as me, I don't expect them to be rational or unbiased by default, and so I only agree with experts or with research if I agree with their line of reasoning and methodology. This is generally at odds with high average/vanilla gifted people who tend to have far more deference to intellectual authority. I know that I run the risk of being wrong, and it is probably a certain kind of hubris, but I have had a religious childhood where I was forced to believe so many stupid things that I don't truly trust anyone's judgment other than my own anymore. This must be balanced with a receptiveness to information that I'm still working on, since it can be incredibly easy to delude yourself into thinking you know more than you actually do. Teachers often get frustrated by me, although I'm usually one of their best students, because I can be anti-authority and march to the beat of my own drum.
One of the things I wonder about is how reasonable the amount of risk is to pursue long shot/dream careers that you are interested in, if you have a very high IQ. Say you want to be a professional novelist. People in your life tell you the likelihood of that happening is very low, like 0.01%. You might disagree, but even for someone EG/PG, it certainly isn't 100%. The amount of risk you're taking by making the decision is completely different if the likelihood is 1%, 10% or 90%. It's incredibly difficult to know in advance. Commonly accepted career advice, knowledge, all tends to break down. You feel alone in your decision making because you will make smarter decisions than just about anyone who isn't at an equivalent intelligence level, so it's useless to ask friends or counselors for advice unless they are also highly gifted. This is especially true if you are figuring things out starting later in life and didn't have opportunities to "spread your wings" as a child (which I didn't). Sometimes, there's the kind of grief where I wish I had realized just how capable I was as a child and forced people to give me better opportunities. I might have been famous, or done incredible things, and that will probably never happen now. What are you, if you had the requisite amount of talent to be a prodigy, but were never given the chance, and discovered later on in college that you actually have something?
Maybe there's a book or articles that address these specific concerns. I'm trying to figure out where I should look, since I'm really lost right now. I have seen books on PG children and prodigies, but they all seem to lead with the idea that one MUST give them opportunities as children. Does that mean that once you're an adult, it's all over? I'm still trying to figure it out, and wonder what your thoughts are.
